You asked me once if there was anything going on that I'd like to talk about.
One of your moderators just banned me on Stack Overflow for a month, telling me that my edits for this question are "entirely out of line", adding that they "have no time for my games". Probably they got confused with this edit of mine. In that edit, I wasn't masking the OP, but just copy-pasted their comment (now removed).
So, there is one thing that I'd like to talk about.
I am not asking about the alleged possibility to do anything "out of line" to a question that is already off topic. Neither is the question itself, which sounds just horrible to any PHP-er, my concern, but prejudice.
It is not a secret that I am not the most adored person around, thanks to my attitude towards the greed of rep-whores, the mindless ignorance of wannabe helpers and a vanity of all sorts. Given gamification is a religion, I am a sinner who spoils other people's game, judging their contribution not just by their sincere desire to help, but by the actual value.
Besides that, I am a pain in the back on Meta.SO, asking harsh and awkward questions there, making people think I am a black-hearted person who is deliberately spoiling their happy and cheerful existence.
So there are people who hate my guts. I was foolish enough before, not watching my tongue and giving them an easy cause to report me. I've learned not to engage in an argument since then. One of these people went so far as to follow after me on Reddit, and tried to slander me there. But anyway, I don't care for these people either.
In the end, a hater's report ends up on a moderator's desk. So my question is: what is the moderator's moral code (if any)? Should they act like an ordinary human, guided by hate, prejudice and slander? Should they act swiftly, taking no time to consider the situation? Should they be driven by a mere jealousy, thinking "Whaat?! That rabble dared to revert an edit that I, a powerful mod, bothered to make? Ban him!"?
I know, they've got not much time to waste: the requests are plenty, the mods are few, while everyone has a family, a job, a life. But if one does not understand the problem and has no time or desire to dig in, why intervene at all? If one is prejudiced towards someone else, why not rein that feeling in, if you act not as a private person but as an official?
I have been a faithful volunteer for Stack Overflow for many years, trying to make this site better; namely, trying to make it stop spreading wild superstitions and outdated practices; editing questions to make them relevant for Google searchers; awarding bounties for the questions that otherwise won't get any attention. For all that everyday work I was offered a pack of a penny-worth stuff which I didn't bother to order. So here goes my question: can I swap this offer for a right to be judged with little less brutality, prejudice and haste?
If (as I suppose) the answer is negative, then I've got only one thing to ask. There is a question I set a bounty for, which ends tomorrow, and now I am unable to award it. If there is a way to make it awarded fully, I'll be very grateful. There are so few worthy questions on SO, and even fewer worthy participants, that I don't want them to be discouraged.